NCAA Power 4 Breakdown, Conference Champion Predictions

Hi, volleyball fans, and welcome back to Volley
Talk, the podcast created for volleyball lovers
who want to dig deep into what is going on in
NCAA and international volleyball. I'm your host,
Sarah Pavan. I'm an Olympian, beach volleyball
world champion, former Nebraska Cornhusker, and
longtime pro, both indoor and on the beach. And
I'm Adam Schultz, former indoor player, international
volleyball coach, and the show's resident stat
guy. As promised last week, this episode is going
to focus predominantly on the NCAA. We know you
NCAA fans have been waiting for this transition
to happen. So international season's over. Pro
leagues overseas are still in preseason or are
just starting up. So we're going to be discussing
what has happened. During the college preseason
and how conference play has started, do a bit
of a conference breakdown prediction session.
You know we love that stuff. We have a special
guest joining us this episode to break things
down and forecast what the rest of the season
will look like that I know listeners will be
excited about. By popular demand. By popular
demand. Okay, can you guess who it is? You're
probably right. Okay, let's get started. Alright,
our highlights for the week. We understand that
the rankings probably have changed since... this
has come out, but we'll keep you posted anyway.
So last week, Texas A &M went up to nine from
13. Baylor went up to 15 from 20. Then we saw
BYU take a dip down to 19 from 14 and Florida
go down to 23 from 19. Obviously a lot has happened
since then. So we're going to see more changes,
but those were the biggest movers last week.
We also had some surprising things happen in
gameplay. We had number 10 Minnesota lose to
Michigan in four. That was a little shocking.
18 Kansas beat Baylor in five. And then West
Virginia, who is unranked, beat number 19 BYU
in five. And BYU is going to keep dropping. BYU
is going to keep plummeting. So if you haven't
guessed it yet, the special guest is Paul. He
is back again. By popular demand. By popular
demand. Although I will say you took a little
bit of flack for your USA over Turkey pick, but
his ego has recovered. He's back and he's willing
to engage with us again. So yeah, going back
to Purdue reverse sweeping UCLA. Am I surprised
that they beat them? No. Am I surprised, however,
that UCLA gave up three match points in set three,
four match points, and then proceeded to just
lose the rest? That's unfortunate. I think it
pays to mention that I think we both thought
Purdue was not going to be very good this year.
They lost five players, including both their
middles and both their very good left sides in
Eva Hudson and Chacoin to other programs. I think
Coach Shondell, from what I heard, was on the
verge of quitting after those things happened
because they had such a good program, and I just
didn't expect them to be very good after being
decimated by the transfer portal. So to see them
in this match, which we'll talk about, it's a
feel -good story for Purdue. You know, a bounce
back from devastating losses. I also expected
them to be pretty bad this year, not going to
lie. And when they had the 13 ranking, I was
like, okay, what is this about? The one attacker,
Wallard, went off. And she played well in both
matches against UCLA and USC, in which they won
both those games. And she's going to be a really
good player for them. What are your takes on
that match? Did you watch that match? I did watch
the match. I actually watched both matches. You
know, my surprise, I can't really say I'm surprised.
I look at Purdue and I look at UCLA and I look
at USC, same as I watch so many other teams.
Everybody seems the same to me right now. I don't
know if we're just being spoiled when we watch
a full roster that can play and everybody has
pieces. USC. seem to me to be very physical especially
just oh they're insane in the middle but they
nobody seems to have a whole package except the
odd team maybe Texas and Nebraska for sure you're
looking at this thinking what has happened over
the course of a year has the fact that the portal
has come into play and nobody can build a program
anymore and a cohesive unit starting to hurt.
And it almost seems like that's what's starting
to happen right now. Well, okay, we can add in
Indiana into this discussion because Indiana
came to LA and they beat UCLA and USC as well.
I have a thought and I want to get both of your
takes on this. I'm starting to see a pattern
with UCLA where... they'll win the first set,
they'll win the first two sets, and then they
lose matches. If you listen to the broadcast
with Purdue and UCLA, UCLA had a very specific
game plan to start. They wanted to hit the ball
down the line and they wanted to run the middle,
which they did very effectively to the tune of
having four match points in the third set. Now,
adjustments were made by Purdue. I think Coach
Shondell does... an amazing job with his team
to see their defensive game plan to see the adjustments
they make Purdue while they don't have any studs
is a well -oiled machine they understand their
defensive responsibilities they're in the right
place they dig a ton of balls they're aggressive
in transition I'm starting to see UCLA have good
game plans for the first part of matches and
then not making adjustments after that no but
like that's my question is that a Purdue thing
was Purdue that good or did UCLA just completely
vacate what had been working for them who counteract
or who changed first? Shondell their team changed
and UCLA didn't match them and I think in my
mind Purdue out coached UCLA in that match so
UCLA won the first set against Indiana and then
lost three straight and I didn't watch that match
but I'm starting to see a pattern where I think
UCLA has good game plans to start and they're
not making in -match adjustments. I would tend
to agree with you. I have a lot of respect for
what... Shondell is doing and yes it was mentioned
on the broadcast that he considered stepping
away from coaching after losing the players he
lost but then gave himself a little time and
said no now it's not the time and he came back
he does a great job prepares his teams very very
well you watch what happened yesterday and against
USC and they're not spectacular that's the thing
they're not spectacular they're Woolner's good
or Wooler I guess her name is she's really good
I don't see them getting to a final four, even
maybe a final eight. I don't know. So I don't
see it, but you know, are they going to compete
for third, fourth, fifth place in the big 10?
I think so. I don't think anybody's really in
the discussion for winning except maybe four
teams this year. I feel in particular, you've
got like a very small group that can even be
in the discussion. And then the rest are just.
there you know what i mean one thing i saw from
purdue that i wanted to highlight watching this
match in terms of the coaching which you want
to talk about is so their right side Purdue.
I believe her name is Grace Haney. I don't love
her arm swing. She doesn't get her elbow back.
She holds her elbow in front of her and she doesn't
have a full swing. And I'm 100 % positive that
they've tried to change her arm swing at some
point, but it's just not happening. Somebody
has tried to change her arm swing. It happens
all the time. So what do they do? They run her
a super fast flat ball because her hand is already
there and she just moves the ball around and
scores. And to me, that's a prime example of
a coach looking at the athletes they have. and
saying, okay, here's the adjustment we're going
to make to take advantage of the things. And
in this case, it's, in my opinion, a deficiency,
and we're going to turn it into a strength. Watching
Purdue play like that, you can just see. Shondell's
hand in all of those decisions and what they
do. And I was super impressed to watch them play
this weekend. And I just I wanted to say that.
And I agree with you, Adam. I just look at that's
a sign of a really good coach, by the way, is
that some coaches come into things looking at
this is what I run and this is what I'm going
to do. And it doesn't matter. We're going to
we're going to do this. And it's impossible.
And I think Dave is looking at. his athletes
and understands what their strengths and weaknesses
are and coaches to those strengths and weaknesses
weaknesses and i think that's just a real a sign
of a really good coach doing the best he can
to get the most that he can that he can out of
his athletes and good for him so what are we
thinking about the indiana situation here because
i don't think anybody would have predicted that
indiana is going to come to la and beat both
of these teams historically no not a chance you
look at ucla And USC, you're talking about the
Blue Blitz, right? Back in my era, they were
outstanding. In recent years, like, not so much.
But still, they're ranked 17 and 24 in the country.
Well, right now they are. We'll see how long
that lasts. Not for long. Well, UCLA is heading
towards not making the tournament for the third
straight year. I don't know if I'd go that far,
Adam. I still think... they're in that number
that's 64 i think i think they can hang on to
that only because i don't think the rest of the
league is so powerful they're going to drop that
far really because i agree with you i think all
the teams a lot of teams are missing pieces when
you have teams that don't have studs and they're
incomplete, it comes down to coaching. It comes
down to execution. It comes down to the details.
And so far, I haven't seen that from UCLA. They've
blown leads. You can't have four match points
against a conference rival and blow that match
in a reverse sweep. And then you can't come in
and, I mean, kudos to Indiana, but you can't
lose that match at home, no less. I remember
back in August when I was on the first time.
Sarah specifically asked you and I a question.
You don't have UCLA in the equation? And both
of us said, nah, no, not at all. And guess what?
We were right on that one because I don't see
them being in the equation either. Preseason
Big Ten number four. I'm curious to see what
happens with USC because They have outstandingly
physical middles. I think there's a ton of potential
there. Their outsides are also incredibly physical,
but they're one -dimensional now. They don't
do anything other than hit hard right in front
of them. So I'm curious to see if they can turn
that program around because they do have athletes,
but they need some volleyball work. And hence,
that's where you had Dave Shondell serving the
ball short to make the middle, occupy the middle.
I thought, brilliant. It's not brilliant, but
he knew exactly what he wanted to do and they
did it. Him as a coach had an outstanding weekend
in California. The Indiana team showed up. They're
like, hello, California. See you later. The last
highlight we wanted to touch on, and I'm not
sure I'd call it a highlight so much as a beatdown
interest story was the absolute beatdown. we
saw between Nebraska and Penn State. Set one
was 25 -6, and then it was 15 -13. So before
we talk about the match, I'm curious what everybody's
expectation going in was. What did you think
was going to happen? I thought Nebraska in three,
but I didn't think they would do what they did.
You didn't predict single digits? Oh, no. No,
no, no, no. I thought, you know, maybe 18, 20,
20, something like that. I thought that Kennedy
Martin would definitely hit probably the 20 kill
mark because they would set her enough to get
that. After I looked at it, I thought it's obvious
Nebraska came into that match and had on their
mind the loss at the NCAA championship and were
out to prove to everybody that not this time.
And boy, did they ever. I had the same thought.
I thought it was going to be three straight.
But similar to you, I thought it was going to
be like 18, 20, somewhat respectable. Six. That's
tough to do. Well, and at Penn State. At Penn
State. It's not like they went to Nebraska and
got six. You got six at home in your own barn.
That's embarrassing. That's embarrassing. I mean.
Like you have to try to only score six points.
Do you know what I mean? Especially when you
have arguably the best or second best point score
in the NCAA on your team. Agreed. Agreed. The
reason Penn State was seven and five coming into
that match, obviously, you know, they're relying
on one horse right now. Let's face it. They're
relying on Kennedy Martin to do everything and
score as many points as she possibly can. And
I think she's doing a great job. And she's trying
to pull this team. Oh, she's doing outstanding.
But I just don't see the others. I think they're...
Selman, I expected more. Me too. I really did.
I expected far more from her, and I don't see
it happening. The other left side, you know,
I think at some point, Schumacher's going to
make a decision about whether she's going to
go with Ewing or stick with Juravicious. The
future is Ewing. i think but right now she she
was she was overmatched she was 0 for 5 in the
match i expected selman to develop a little bit
like at ohio state you saw that she had potential
but she wasn't like great by any means and i
expected to see her develop a little bit more
in the off season she's been a huge disappointment
for me but also like My question for you guys
is, even with Izzy Stark, do you think this Penn
State team is composed in a way to have had success?
I'm going to answer it this way. Izzy Stark doesn't
pass the volleyball. Yep. Well, that's what I
was thinking. I was like, okay, Penn State fans
at the beginning of the season were talking about
how good Penn State was looking. They were so
excited for the season, blah, blah, blah. That's
great. You lost arguably your best player in
Izzy Stark. Granted, she's not a point scorer,
whatever. But would things be different with
her there still? I don't know. I think we all
thought Emmy Selman was going to turn into something.
I had the same. I was very high on her last year.
I thought she was outstanding at Ohio State.
I thought, man, the future is bright for this
kid. She's going to be fantastic. I personally
think she's had a regression at Penn State from
what she showed at Ohio State. She had a couple
really good matches at Ohio State. It's not like
she was like... doing anything wild but i haven't
i haven't seen any of those flashes here like
i haven't seen her put together anything and
i think all of us talk often about the same thing
and it's basically you have to be able to run
some middle to get the rest of the offense going
their passing is so poor that they can't run
the middle and when they can run the middle they
actually do okay but it's just not happening
enough for them to be able to sustain. So basically
now they're sitting on Kennedy Martin and go
ahead and do it. You're not going to beat Nebraska
with one player scoring points. You're just not
going to do it. But what was your plan? Well,
I think Jurevicius showed some great character
in the run last season. No, but Kennedy Martin
signed later. Like Emmy Selman signed with Penn
State right when the portal opened last year.
Kennedy Martin was way after that. I feel like
the original plan was to have Jurevicius play
the right side. Who the heck were you planning
on having on the left? Well, whoever it was should
show up there soon because they need to do something.
What was your plan here? I don't remember two
teams of that historic quality, one team just
getting absolutely decimated like that. I've
never seen that. amongst teams like that? Well,
here's another question that I was asked. Has
it ever happened in NCAA that a team who wins
the championship doesn't make the tournament
the next year? Has that ever happened? I reached
out to Avid Volley, you know, our source for
a lot of information. Even they didn't know.
I bet that is highly unlikely. Okay, so who do
you think has a better chance of making the tournament,
UCLA or Penn State? Didn't Penn State lose to
UCLA? They did. Kennedy Martin had 35 kills in
that match, I believe. Well, right now, it comes
down to, I think UCLA probably has a better chance
right now because Penn State is falling like
a stone. I just looked at it a few minutes ago,
and Penn State was beating... Maryland 2 -0.
So it looks like they're going to move on to
win that one. But at some point, you've got to
beat somebody. The fact that we're happy that
Penn State is up 2 -0 on Maryland, who would
have thought that would have been a thing? That's
wild. You know, Penn State can come out and say,
hey, we lost our season because Izzy Stark screwed
us. Or left. Take your pick about how you want
to word that. But I think you're right, Sarah.
I think they were going to be in trouble on the
left side, regardless of whether Izzy was here.
Mendelsohn can't get the ball. You have... one
person who's being set, who's expected to carry
all of the load. And even defensively, they don't
look very good. They are disjointed. And it's
actually a dichotomy for me. You have Penn State
loses their player, and they seem like they're
falling apart. They're not paying attention to
the details. Purdue loses a whole bunch of their
players, and they seem to have rallied around
that. And they're doing the best they can with
the athletes they have, and they're disciplined,
and they're pushing teams. a choice in how you
respond to these situations. And I understand
it's not quite the same, but I think the theory
and the principle of that applies. So here's
a question that was submitted about this. As
coaches and former player, what would your messaging
be to the coaching staff or players on Penn State
in how to navigate this situation with losing
Stark? If you were in their shoes as coaches,
what would your approach be? I can speak for
me personally. After she left, you look at the
team and you say teams are about the next man
up mentality. Is this great? No, but we still
have one of the best players in the country.
We are still a storied. program. The expectation
does not change. We take care of our details
and we have to go out and play. You know what?
Maybe you sulk about it for a week and then you
get back to work. The attitude of the coaching
staff and the head coach, I actually... didn't
love her response to the question. It was cold.
And I understand the emotion behind that, but
you have to say that's her choice. This is our
program. We're Penn State. We're going to keep
going. Like that's at least the message that
for me has to come out. That's our whole slogan.
We are. That's the messaging that I would give
as a coach. And then it's business as usual.
Your preparation stays the same. Your attitude
stays the same. Your expectations stay the same.
They're underperforming, in my opinion. From
my point of view, I think everybody's faced at
some point that they're going to lose somebody
important either through injury or something
else. Something's going to happen. And you have
to have a look at your team and decide, what
do I have to do to give us the best opportunity
to win? And right now with Penn State, yes, we
have Kennedy Martin. Great. We have some middles.
Great. What do we have to do and put on the floor
to make sure that we get what we need out of
this right now? Is non -passing left sides an
answer? No. Now, the NCAA has enough subs that
you can put defensive specialists in to bolster
that passing as long as you have them on your
roster. I don't know if they have that on their
roster. But if you don't, shame on you because
you have that many subs that you can use. They
have Grimes. They've got the other girl who comes
in to serve all the time. They've got a couple.
They're not like a Nebraska DS heavy roster,
but. But what they have has to be better than
the passing they're getting currently. You know,
it's really no different than talking like to,
I'm going to be honest with you, talking today
like with 14 -year -old girls and saying. We
have to be the best at what we can do. If we
can do that, we'll have success. Plain and simple.
And then on the player's perspective, it's like,
yeah, I can understand you might feel betrayed.
You might feel upset. Completely understandable.
But it's like, how are you going to approach?
You still have the opportunity to get better
every day. You have to have the pride. of being
like, no, we are the reigning national champions.
We are going to find a way. I think it's easy
to kind of get wrapped up in things that happen
to you instead of what am I going to do to make
a change and make a difference? I thought that
that question was interesting. I'm hoping that
Schumacher Collie looks at this and says, okay,
guys. Let's rally the troops here and figure
out. We're in a position now that decisions are
going to be made to give us the best chance to
win. Everybody has to buy into this and you have
to put the team first and whatever we have to
do, we're going to do. You don't discount the
whole season because you got blown out by Nebraska.
You can get past that. But what do you do now?
That's the key. What do you do now? My last question
about this before we get into the NCAA conference
breakdown is. Will Kennedy Martin transfer again?
Or do you think she'll stick it out at Penn State?
And if she does transfer, somebody sent in a
question, could you see her going to Nebraska?
Yes. Which part? Yes, transferring and yes to
Nebraska? I believe, and I said this yesterday
to my wife, and we were talking about this, and
I said, if this does not improve and something
doesn't walk in, She will pursue Nebraska, and
they will take her. When does Olivia Babcock
graduate? They're the same age. They're both
juniors. Interesting. I think she will leave.
I was thinking Kentucky over Nebraska purely
because the Italian kid is finding her legs.
She's starting to play better. Rightly or wrongly,
I think Danny has a little bit of loyalty as
a coach, and I also think that you— You can never—I'm
sorry. That is never a bad thing, I don't think.
No, I'm not saying that is a bad thing. You said
rightly or wrong. I just wanted to say, in my
perspective, having that loyalty is never a bad
thing. But you also have her for four years.
If you burn that bridge and bring somebody in
for one year, I don't think it's a good long
-term play for the program. Now, if it wins you
a national championship, maybe, but I'm curious.
But at what cost? Yeah, I'm curious to see how
good she is by the end of the season because
I think her and Bergen, I think she's finding
her set. I think she played better against Penn
State. I'm just not sure there'll be a difference,
but I'm not sure how much of a difference there
will be, and I think that she could make a better
difference at Kentucky. Interesting. Yeah, you
make a good point there, actually. Originally,
when all this happened, I was like, no, she's
not going to transfer because, I mean, I know
it happens, and I know that people do jump around.
I can't, she doesn't strike me as the type of
person that would transfer again. But again,
do I know her? Absolutely not. I don't know.
I just, I had that feeling, but seeing this dumpster
fire that the season has become, like, it's hard
to say. I don't know. I posted a poll on Instagram
yesterday and the majority of people said she
would transfer again. Well, let's see how the
season ends. I think that'll be the key to this
whole thing. How does this end? And who comes
in, right? Like they're going to, they're clearly
going to go to the portal. If they get one more
left side and a half decent setter, they're going
to be a good team again. All right, that was
our NCAA recap of the week. A couple very surprising
things happening. But as I said, the rankings
are for sure going to be flipping around like
crazy this week. So I'm excited to see what happens
moving forward. We finished non -conference play.
We're a week behind actual conference play because
of Men's World Championships. I wanted to take
a look at the top four conferences. I wanted
to talk about some of the teams that will be
contending for the top of those conferences.
Are we surprised? What did we think of their
non -conference play? And where do we see them
going for the rest of the season? So we're going
to start with the SEC. Paul, give me your top
four or five teams in an order, and then give
me your dark horse team for that division. My
top three are Texas, Kentucky, and Texas A &M,
in that order. If I was to pick another team,
possibly, right now I'm leaning toward Tennessee.
Ooh, not a team we've talked about very often.
I look at Tennessee, outstanding. I can't say
they're outstanding, but they lost to Purdue
3 -1. I don't know if that's a great loss, maybe
at the time, but I just don't see the overall
strength in the SEC to think that anybody's going
to be any better. Florida may rally eventually.
What about Missouri? Missouri's lost a lot of
matches. They have. For some reason, they always
hang around to me. I feel like they're always
just around. Yeah. They do hang around. You're
right. Will they make any noise? No. They fit
into that group of teams that are decent but
don't have a star. They're good defensively.
They serve tough. They're a gritty team, but
they can't score. There's a lot of those, and
that's another one. I don't look at Missouri
as really making any noise at all, to be honest
with you. I just look at this thing and... I
think it's pretty obvious that there's three
teams that are just better than everybody else.
What are your teams? I really like Texas. I think
they're doing a good job. They've had their young
players step up. They've gelled well. So I think
they're going to be at the top. I agree. Kentucky
is going to be number two. I also agree. I thought
Texas A &M at the beginning of the season, but
they have not looked good recently. They have
a couple losses. They look... disjointed they
haven't been able to find any defensive rhythm
while they're relatively big it's just it's not
clicking yet so I'm curious to see if they can
get it on the rails I really like their coach
I think he does a good job but this is potentially
another situation where you know he's coached
internationally he has a ton of experience I'm
wondering if they're trying to do a little bit
too much with the athletes that they have, but
I think they will finish third just because they're
well prepared, they're big, and the rest of the
conference isn't super strong. I'm a little surprised
at Florida. I thought they would be better, but
I think they still have a shot to finish. fourth
in that conference. And I think Missouri will
finish fifth. I'm with you guys on the top two.
Texas, Kentucky. I haven't loved watching Texas
A &M. It's a similar situation to what we're
seeing from Penn State. You're riding the Lednicki
train as far as she'll take you. Their left sides
do not impress me at all. Kossak -Paula, she's
a really good blocker. I think they're very one
-dimensional. So I'm going to take a flyer here
and I'm going to put Florida at number three.
Okay, I'm just going to say something because
it's really important as we move on in this.
What we're seeing here with Texas and Kentucky,
there's other conferences that have the same
issue. There's two powerhouse teams and then
the cast of others. And you can flip a coin and
you don't know what's going to happen. And this
is what's happening here. adam asked for three
i gave three and i think for me texas am not
for you but there's two and then the other exactly
exactly and i think you're seeing i hate to say
it but you're seeing with like the nil and stuff
it's creating more separation than parity and
i think with the transfer portal with nil i think
some discussion was around more teams have the
opportunity to be good. It's going in the opposite
direction. We're seeing just the cream rise to
the top and everybody else is just in their own
little mix. Well there's good competition from
three to ten. Yeah so pre -season but I'm sorry
pre -season should not be more exciting than
conference play. It shouldn't be. The majority
of your season is spent in conference. Did we
peak like September 1st? I've said that all along
about this portal. My whole take on the portal
was everybody thought there's going to be a little
more parity. Uh -uh, not a chance. You're going
to have a Marquette, for instance, take this
young kid that nobody wanted out of high school
and develop her into something that turns into
something special by her sophomore year. And
that person's leaving Marquette, not for a worse
team. They're going to get to Nebraska or Wisconsin
or one of those. Well, look at Ramsey Gary for
Texas. Ramsey Gary played for Indiana and now
she's playing for Texas. Like, are you kidding
me? And I'm sorry, but like this increased scholarship
limit, while I think it's great, it just allows
the really good teams to get more. players from
everybody else. And the NIL is letting the really
good teams find loopholes to be able to pay the
difference for others. Like, it's just, it's
wild to me. Absolutely. This doesn't surprise
me in the slightest. Saw this coming. Well, Danny
Busboom Kelly earlier, a few weeks ago, came
out and said that she thinks that the SEC could
be stronger than the Big Ten. Do we agree with
this statement? After everything we just said
about how there's two really good teams, three
1Bs, as Adam likes to call them, and then everyone
else. It's a battle. You think that they're similar
strength of conferences? I think from top to
bottom, I still think the Big Ten. But if you're
looking at the top five or six, if they had a
similar type of thing, a SEC versus Big Ten.
I think you'd see a lot more parity than you'd
think there. Okay, let's go to the Big Ten. Let's
pick our top. Give me your top five in the Big
Ten, and then we'll compare a couple of those.
Top five? Oof. Yeah, we'll make it interesting.
Okay, sure. Nebraska, Wisconsin, and it's funny
because I have a bunch of them written down here.
Then I have, take your pick of three, four, five
here. Purdue, Minnesota, Indiana. You have Indiana.
Yeah, maybe. Illinois, maybe. That's what I have
right now. I don't see Penn State in this equation.
Okay, so let me ask you this. Out of Indiana,
Purdue, and Illinois, which of those teams beats
Texas A &M? Purdue, maybe. I think it would be
a decent match. If you look at Purdue, they have
beaten Kansas and SMU, okay? So there's two good
victories for them. They're proving that they
can play with people, but can they beat them
regularly? But they can play. So I don't think
it's too far -fetched to think that Purdue wouldn't
beat Texas A &M. I think that's fair. I think
Purdue's winning that one. I'm not sure that
I agree with Danny that the SEC is. I think at
this point you could make the argument that the
ACC is stronger than the Big Ten, but the SEC,
I don't know about that. Well, if we can go back,
if you look at what we were talking about, Texas
A &M, Purdue. Texas A &M lost to SMU three straight.
Gotta love that sport logic where I beat you
and you beat them, so I'm going to beat you.
If A is better than B and B is better than C,
then A is better than C. But that I think is
the point we're making is that once you get that
pass to anybody can beat anybody. That's true.
And the thing for me is like, if you're not in
that legit conversation for a conference title
or a national championship, then what are we
doing? You know what I mean? Yeah. Who are your
top five for the Big Ten? Nebraska, Wisconsin.
I hate that. Okay, Wisconsin fans are going to
hate me. Earlier at the beginning of the season,
I was like, Wisconsin is just not it. They are
going to be so much worse. They've taken such
a dip. And I kind of hate that it's still like
Nebraska, Wisconsin at the top. Not because I
hate Wisconsin, but because I'm like, okay, here
we are. I mean, I definitely think they're podcast
from that. And we all said the same thing. It
wasn't just unique to you. We all said the same
thing. Fair, fair. I mean, don't get me wrong.
Wisconsin took a step back for sure. They're
not the same team as they were last year. I don't
think many are. I feel like the overall level
of the NCAA has kind of taken a decline. That's
a hot take for you. That's another conversation.
That's a hot take. You have many athletes who
were able to play more years who have left. Yes.
And there is a bit of a vacuum. in the ncaa right
now with those players leaving so i mean that's
not it's not a hot take in my opinion i would
agree that the level has dropped a little bit
because you had players who could play five years
who could play six years for whatever reason
and those two years make a huge difference so
i don't think that's necessarily a hot take i
am curious to see if Mimi Collier continues to
have the season that she has already had. I don't
have any reason to think that it won't happen,
but she still has to do it because right now
they are relying heavily on her to score points
and to do those. So if she gets figured out or
has some off matches, I think they're number
two, but I don't think they're securely number
two. They can be beat. I'm sticking with my top
three. What I've seen in the last couple weeks
when I've watched, I've been impressed by her
ability to score. And Grace Egan, before she
got injured, was doing a very good job. She got
hurt, and they brought in this young girl, freshman
named Maddie Quest, who's doing a good job. Booth
is still putting up a good block. and they're
using her more. They're doing what they have
to do with the pieces they do. And I think that's
what I just alluded to a few minutes ago, is
you look at what you have and you do what you
can with the pieces you have. Wisconsin's not
nearly as physical as they used to be, but they're
still more physical than most teams. And I think
on any given night, that goes a long way. If
you think about matching up against the Purdue,
it's a long night for Purdue, given the size
difference. with Wisconsin. And that gives them
the edge. Purdue has to play at 90, 95 % of their
capability to overcome that. Wisconsin can play
at 80, 85 because they're going to be able to
score some of those points just because they're
a little more athletic. So that's always kind
of the interesting give or take when you have
athletes of different calibers on different teams.
Well, that comes down to the same thing we were
talking about a few minutes ago about Wisconsin
have Collier, Texas A &M have Lednicki. And it's
basically what do you have around you that's
going to make the difference. I know I was just
making fun of Wisconsin a little bit. I do have
to give them credit. Their identity for the last
six, seven years have been just blocking machines,
really big, physical. And the fact that they've
maintained. success while having to completely
rework what they're about. I think they deserve
credit for that. Kelly Sheffield deserves credit
for that. Furbringer deserves credit. She has
been good. They do deserve props for how they've
evolved. But I'm going to put my top three as
Nebraska, Wisconsin, Purdue. And then after that,
no idea. I mean, Minnesota lost. Minnesota, I'm
still, like, I was not a Minnesota fan last year,
and I'm still not a Minnesota fan, and they've
had some injuries again. So, yeah, no. Do we
think Michigan State is going to keep upsetting
teams? No. No. Hard no. Do we think Indiana is
still going to keep upsetting teams? More likely,
I think. I'm looking forward to seeing them.
Yeah, I'm like, no, I need to tune in and pay
closer attention. All right, so let's move on
to the ACC, which might be the most interesting
conference. I don't think you have, you still
have top teams, but you don't have quite as much
separation in this conference as you do in the
previous two that we've talked about, in my opinion.
So I'm very curious to hear what your guys' thoughts
are about the top teams in the ACC. Pitt, Stanford,
Louisville. You're putting Stanford above Louisville?
Yep, I am. So I feel like the contenders or people
who are in the discussion for me are Pitt, Stanford,
Louisville, SMU. Maybe you could throw in a Miami.
Maybe a North Carolina, maybe. Maybe a North
Carolina. But when I'm looking at top three,
I mean, SMU is always like in the discussion
for top 10 or whatever, but I just don't think...
that they are at the level of the pit stanford
louisville i haven't loved what i've seen from
louisville this year i think they're good when
you can't set cara cressy though the wheels fall
off so as soon as that pass makes the middle
not good to run as soon as cressy gets to the
back row They just bleed out on the court. That
is a really tough position to be in. So I'm also,
I'm going to agree with you. I'm going to do
Pitt, then Stanford, then Louisville. The young
athletes for Stanford have been like quite good.
I'm going to take a flyer here. I think Stanford's
going to win this conference this year. I think
they're young. I think they're hungry. I think
they're well coached. Pitt's been here. I equate
Pitt, and for those of you who know I'm a hockey
fan, I think Pitt's the, they're the Leafs. They
know they're going to make the playoffs. And
then they're going to just like blow it right
away. And I think it's hard to stay motivated.
I can see Pitt dropping one or two matches to
a middle -ranked team where Babcock has an off
night or is a little bit banged up. And I don't
think they have a ton of depth on that team.
Well, that's the thing with Pitt is if Olivia
Babcock is not good, they are a completely different
team. It's the same thing that we've talked about
with Penn State, with Texas A &M. These three
good opposites for these programs, the structure
of the team around them is very similar, which
is scary. Yeah, I just don't see. somebody else
coming up if Babcock doesn't play all of the
games. I don't think there's a ton around her.
Now, they're obviously not bad players. They
have good players around her, but who's going
to score points? It's hard to be at the top.
Everyone wants to knock off Pitt because of the
success they've had. They need to be incredibly
mentally tough to manage a season and the expectation
where everybody is gunning for you. And on the
flip side, Stanford's young. Those kids don't
know any different. There's no pressure on them.
There's no expectations. I mean, there's expectations
because you're playing. for stanford but in terms
of you know where that team has been and i think
that that can be that can be huge i think they're
gonna roll i think they're gonna have a ton of
fun and when they play my money's on stanford
i look at pitt's situation very similar to what
you guys are saying with i see babcock kennedy
martin okay what i see is two very good middles
for pitt a better passing team than pitt And
if you can get those middles. No, better than
Penn State, yes. Pitt has better middles than
Penn State. And better passing. But they pass
better than Penn State. If you can get them involved,
that opens up things for the other side a little
bit more. I do think, you know, they don't have,
like, Selman's okay. She's not proven herself
yet. But she can be physical enough. But I think
they can be the second left side. Probably right
now better than Penn State's second left side.
So I think there's a little more there. Stanford?
Stanford's always good. Stanford's never bad.
They're Stanford. Get that West Coast Ivy League
education, kids. I'm banking on the fact that
Olivia Babcock is going to show up when necessary.
So that's why I have Pitt as number one. But
what is your definition of necessary? Score all
the points, duh. Yeah, but is she going to show
up? against Miami is she going to show up against
Louisville against SMU like all the teams the
left sides for Pitt they're capable they're good
players if the left sides falter is Olivia Babcock
going to be able to carry the load that's what
I mean when necessary because like she does draw
enough attention that the left sides for Pitt
have been able to kind of find their rhythm work
their way into it and start to like establish
their own identity but If not, and then now defenses
are focusing more on the left side, it's like,
what's going to happen? That's what I mean as
far as, like, can the outside core balance each
other enough? I think that Olivia Babcock will
always be able to pick up the slack if the left
sides are struggling. But you were the one who
picked Stanford to win. No, but my bigger question
is, is that team capable of picking up the slack
when Olivia is struggling? They've never had
to. What happens if he is... injured or she has
an off night and all of a sudden everybody's
looking around going well who's who's going to
score points because it's always Olivia. I'm
just I'm curious to see what happens. I see that's
the point. I don't think that that's going to
happen in when they play Stanford or when they
play Miami. Like I don't think that's going to
happen. Maybe it'll happen. I'm giving her a
lot of credit. One thing I liked about Babcock
recently she's playing some pretty good defense
too. Oh yeah she's improved defensively. Yeah,
she's picking up balls. I like that. She digs
her nose in the way she goes. I like that. You
know the three of us love a six rotation right
side. Let's look at ACC. Yes or no, top 10 ACC
teams better than the top 10 Big Ten teams? I'm
going to say across the board, yes. You have
Pitt. When we were going through this at the
beginning, I was able to name six decent contenders.
I'm not sure that I felt like I could do that
with the Big Ten. You know, when you look at
Miami, Stanford, North Carolina, Louisville,
Pitt, SMU, there's six teams right there that
are pretty competitive and can play. And I go
back and I'm using Purdue as the example because
I think they're a similar style team that's very
well coached. Like, I don't think they beat Pitt,
Stanford, or Louisville. And so when I start
to look at do they beat Miami, I don't know.
Do they beat SMU? I don't think so. And you kind
of look down that list and compare what I would
consider Big Ten 3 to ACC 4, 5, 6. I think the
ACC is better. Remember, and I'm not saying this
is third against – Purdue beat SMU 3 -1. Fair.
But then, of course, if we're playing first against
first, second against second, third against third,
it's probably not – I would not dispute that.
It's an interesting thought experiment. So as
of right now, we're thinking ACC is strongest
conference. I think so. Yeah, they're pretty
good. We've got one conference left to discuss
in the Big 12. This conference. This one's an
interesting conference now. Here we go. This
to me is the spaghetti bowl conference. What
is that? You throw the spaghetti against the
wall and you have no idea what's going to stick.
When I look at this... We've got Colorado currently
leading the conference. Wow. I feel like on any
given night, any of these teams could beat another
one, but they could all lose against unranked
teams, and I wouldn't bat an eye. I think that's
fair. I have high expectations for a couple teams,
but I understand what you're saying. Arizona
State, I think, is probably the pace car in this
conference. I would agree with that. But then
you look at, who are you putting next? Kansas,
TCU, BYU, all of them have lost to unranked teams,
if I'm not mistaken. Well, Colorado, first of
all, have no signature wins, in my mind. I don't
consider BYU, the way they're going in Utah,
as a signature win. No, their trajectory is definitely
down. They've lost to Colorado State two times
already in preseason play. 3 -0 and 3 -1. So
I'm not sure that that 4 -0, playing in that
conference, and the best teams you have played
are BYU and Utah and you beat them. But when
you look at where BYU and Utah are right now,
they're not lighting anybody up. But where do
you think BYU is going to end the season? Remember,
I picked them as one of my top three in August.
Well, that's my point. Where do I think they're
going to end up? Six. Fifth, sixth, seventh?
Seventh? Somewhere around there? Seventh? Sixth?
I don't know. I don't think any of us had TCU
on our radars either, though, in August. No.
So for me, my top teams, the way that I think
it's going to shake out for Big 12 is Arizona
State, TCU. You know, I'm going to go with Kansas.
Oh, you stole mine. That was what I was going
to pick. Arizona State. tcu kansas and i'm actually
not convinced that tcu doesn't end up beating
arizona state yeah maybe i went tcu arizona state
kansas okay we all have the same top three i
like kansas but you know why i like kansas they
have More losses, but they played one heck of
a schedule. But that is why I have them on the
list. Sure, Baylor's 4 -1 right now. Kansas'
schedule has been way tougher, I think, overall,
even in the preseason. So they are battle -tested
against strong teams. But I think this conference,
I don't think anybody's going to go unbeaten.
I think the top team is going to have three or
four losses. I think you're going to see a roll
-the -dice results in this conference all season
long. When I watch the teams from this conference,
there's just a lack of consistency from night
to night. You watch the passing breakdown. You
watch hitters have meltdowns where they're hitting
negative. You watch errors just happening across
the board. There's inconsistent volleyball. And
then there's some great matches where it's all
just clicking. It'll be who can put a consistent
performance on the floor for conference play
that's going to win, in my opinion. I look at
this, and I agree with you, Adam, in that. If
you're a fan and you want to go watch some competitive
volleyball, this may be the conference because
you could have a great match every time they
step on the floor. This is the conference that
I see is the most competitive conference of all
that will have nobody in the final four and maybe
nobody in the final eight, but they will be competitive.
That's another hot take for you guys today. Big
12, most competitive conference with no one in
the final four or final eight. Group analysis,
best conference, strongest conference, ACC, most
competitive conference top to bottom within their
own conference, Big 12, with SEC and Big 10 having
the powerhouses at the very top and then kind
of diluting down from there. So what conferences
do we think are going to be represented in the
Final Four? If we have our crystal ball right
now, who do we think? Preliminary thoughts, who
are the Final Four teams? I mean, depending on
what the rankings go in, I would say my Final
Four would be Texas, Nebraska, Kentucky, Pitt.
Not disagreeing with you. I think those are the
four best teams of the country right now. If
any one of them is going to drop out, I think...
Pitt could be the one that drops out. I could
see if Louisville and Pitt had to play in the
quarterfinals, that would be a potential matchup
where Pitt could lose. What about Stanford? You
were so high on Stanford. I do, but they're young.
I think they're going to have a really good season.
But again, I think you have to learn how to win
in big moments. And so I can see them running
into a Nebraska or a Texas. in the quarterfinals
and they're just not they're not there yet another
team that i think could possibly sneak in depending
on the matchups and i think that has a lot to
do with what's going to happen here wisconsin
could sneak in if they continue and collier continues
the way she is and i know there's a lot of ifs
going on right now how do i want to put that
at the end of the day the teams that are playing
the best at the end of the season will probably
find a way similar to what penn state did on
their run last year sure i'm not sure wisconsin
is a final four caliber though i'm not sure either
but you know i think there's teams there like
pitt that could be upset depending on what's
going on if babcock happens to have a bad match
like adam said that's that's huge on them i'm
nebraska texas for sure yeah my instinct is to
say kentucky pitt could i see louisville and
pitt going at it in a quarterfinal match Yes,
if they can keep getting Cressy the ball. Could
I see Wisconsin and Kentucky going at it and
Wisconsin blocking really well and making life
difficult? I could see that. If we're talking
about the top eight, I think Wisconsin's there.
I think that Stanford is there. I think that
Louisville is there. That last spot. you know,
very draw -dependent, I would say. I mean, those
would be the teams that I think are at the top
right now. Could be a Big 12 team just to spite
me. Yeah, exactly. The Big 12 is going to sneak
in and have two teams in the final eight just
to be like, heh. That's our conference analysis
going into the second half of NCAA College Volleyball.
I'm sure there are going to be a lot of opinions
about what we've said. We want to hear them.
post them on YouTube, send them in on Instagram.
We love having the conversations. We love knowing.
what you guys think about your teams, because
obviously you're in that day in and day out.
And again, send us questions. We love talking
about them. We'll see a few that come up here
comparing different teams. We will often pick
matches that we watch for fun based off some
of the comments so that we can talk about them.
So if you have something burning that you want
discussed here, let us know and we'll do our
best to get to it. Okay, it is time for listener
questions. Question number one. Would you rather
have a middle that can lead the blocking system
very well and have good synergy with the defense
or a middle that has an Olivia Babcock level
attack? Olivia Babcock level attack. What is
your take? This is actually a very interesting
question. Yeah, I'm thinking about team composition
and I don't think you generate a ton of points
in the middle in general. I think if your block...
has holes in it. The defense becomes harder and
transition in the women's game is really important.
There aren't a ton of teams that get lots of
first ball kills. I think I would go defensive.
I look at it this way. If you're that good that
you can dominate offensively, I can teach you
to block. That's not what the question is, though.
There's a lot of middles out there that are gripe
blockers and can't score points. That I don't
disagree with you with. No, but you have to pick
one or the other. So my thing is... I'll take
the offense and I'll teach you the rest. No,
no, that's not the question. You get one or the
other. No, no, but okay, so I'm taking the offensive
one knowing I can teach her to block. I'm not
saying I'm taking... I'm being answering one.
I'm taking the great attack. And I'll develop
the other one. So I have both. So for me, the
women's game is like pretty fast. If you have
a powerhouse offensive middle, the one -on -ones
that your outsides are going to get with the
speed of the offense, you're going to see a lot
more first ball kills. So that is why I'm a proponent
for the offense. But then blocking, you're not
always... in control. So you can be a great blocker,
but another team's scheme and system can best
you. An offensive middle A will score points
like crazy when they're set, but when they're
not set, the openings that they're creating for
everybody else on the court is so good. See,
I think about it where, yes, you want to own
the middle of the court and you want to hold
the block. I can do that with a left side coming
out of the pipe. I can mitigate that with a left
side, and I can still own the middle court, and
my middles are getting touches and slowdowns,
and I'm cutting off the court that my defenders
need to play, and I can move my libero in, and
I'm getting more transition attacks, and I'm
making life difficult on other hitters. I think
if you have an elite -level blocking middle,
it just lets everything else settle into place.
We'll find the offense on the pins. Okay, we
have a disagreement. People write in and let
us know what you think. Yes, we do. Okay, question
two. I'm curious what you guys believe is the
reason that players outside of the U .S. struggle
to assimilate to the NCAA in the same way that
the college players struggle to assimilate to
pro play or the international game. So we talk
a lot about how detrimental the NCAA development
can be to certain players' pro careers, but why
is it that players that come from pro leagues
abroad don't always have a walk in the park in
the NCAA? So we saw Adriana's struggle. We see
Marina Markova, who didn't do a ton at Florida.
crushing it at Vakaf Bank. It's just players
like that. It's like, how are you playing at
such a high level internationally or pro in the
NCAA? You're not dominating. The Nikolovs are
the exception. Who? The Nikolovs, the brothers.
I look at this and I think because the athletes
you're getting from Europe that are coming here,
they're not the best athletes. The best athletes
in Europe at 18, 19 years old even. are playing
in the pro level and they stay there because
they're earning money so you're getting players
coming over here that aren't the best players
and moving into a system that is not a system
they're used to so that that's part of the reason
i think it doesn't happen that way and the american
system i don't think lends itself to going over
to europe to be a great player because of the
substitution rules and the way it limits what
they can do Yeah, but we're seeing Marina Markova,
who is dominating Champions League and the Turkish
League with Vakafenk. But when she played for
Florida, wasn't doing much. Adriano, like, yeah,
she's not the best of the best. But she was still
playing like A2 Italy, which is a higher level
than we're seeing in the NCAA. And it's just
like she was hitting under 100 up until recently
on the season. I think a lot of it has to do
with setting. So think about how many setters
you have in the NCAA. You're not going to be
super consistent. You're going to have a big
variety of where the ball goes, what you're trying
to do offensively. Whereas if you're playing
pro, you generally, on the better teams, have
older setters who understand what they're trying
to do. It's a position that is a little more
skilled and a little more developed. We looked
at and we talked about with Adriano. Nebraska
wants to run a super fast offense. She's used
to hitting higher sets, and I think it took Bergen
-Riley. a little bit of time to find setting
speed with setting height for her and when to
use her and those kind of things. And setting
in libero, I think, are mature positions. You
need to play them a little bit longer to really
settle in and understand how to give each hitter
their own set and how to run that. And so with
younger, inexperienced setters, I think the transition
is different because when you're playing for
Vacath Bank, when you're playing in Italy, those
setters are putting the ball on a tee for you
most of the time. You know where the ball is.
So I think there's an adjustment period there.
And I also think culturally for some of these
kids coming over, being in more of a professional
setting and then having to do school and having
to do all of these other things. I think it just
takes a little bit of time. Question three. Why
do you think the Ivy League conference is so
uncompetitive? Is it because they don't offer
athletic scholarships? This person. contributed
more saying i know club volleyball is very expensive
the majority of athletes who play club are wealthy
but the ivy leagues offer financial aid for people
who maybe can't afford to go there they're gonna
get an incredible education and be able to be
set up for a job after like why are the really
good players not going to the ivy league i think
part of the problem is that Number one, you have
to get into the school. That's one of the things.
That's going to limit who you get. I think most
players that are playing at a high club level
want to have an opportunity to go to the NCAA
tournament and have a chance to potentially do
well at the NCAA tournament. And most people
know that if I go to an Ivy League, I might be
the best player. by a long shot if i'm one of
the top recruits in the country but i will never
have a chance to win and i think that has a lot
to do with it it's like the stanford thing though
stanford being who they are we could argue that
but they just not everybody can go to stanford
because of the history there's a pool of athletes
available issue but then there's also a priority
issue the ivy leagues they don't put the same
value on winning they still want to win don't
get me wrong but it's not the same as playing
like the coaches aren't getting fired if they
have a bad season exactly the expectations in
those programs just aren't the same as the top
programs across the country yeah I think like
you guys were saying the academic standards yes
a lot of really good athletes are strong academically
but not necessarily the standard that is expected
for an Ivy League education. So I think, as you
were saying, the pool of athletes that are even
available to get in and be admitted to an Ivy
League school is very small. What current NCAA
outside hitters do you think have the potential
for success internationally and for an international
club career? This person said they think Harper
Murray, Ilya Rubin, and Tori Stafford are the
only ones that come to mind. Really? Wow. I might
not make any friends, but I don't think Harper
Murray should be on the list. I don't think her
style of play and her offensive ability lends
itself to the level we're looking at for international
play and top pro career. Yeah, are we talking
top six teams in Italy, national team? Or just
playing pro somewhere? No, we're talking like
national team career and top international club
career. Can I dial this back a bit? I remember
back in August, I thought Murray against Kentucky
played the best game I've seen her play at Kentucky.
That she would have a chance if she continued
that to be a player of the year. I haven't seen
that continue. It's got me concerned going forward.
So I agree with you, Sarah. If her style of play,
especially attacking against a double block,
which you'll see a huge amount when you go to
the pro level in Europe, if you can't start to
score against that double block and find ways
to score, you're going to struggle. And I think
Harper -Murray has now gone back and the double
block still creates problems. And it only gets
worse when you go against the European block,
if you play at the top levels, facing the defenses
you face behind that block. I'm not sold, but
I said early, a few minutes ago, Babcock, she's
got the goods. I would say her, yes, but like
outsides, not opposites. And honestly, I am having
a hard time thinking of an outside. I like Tori
Stafford a lot. I don't know if I could even
put Ilya Rubin in there. I'm having a hard time
thinking of outsides right now. I think there
are very few P1 outsides in NCAA right now. Honestly,
an Eva Hudson? No, I don't think so. I don't
think top. If you had to pick one, two, and three
outsides who have the best chance, do I think
she's going to go play for Vacath Bank? No. But
if we're talking about P1 outside hitters who
have the best chance out of the crop of outsides
right now, I think Eva Hudson's on the list.
I think Brooklyn DeLay could potentially be on
that list. Well, if you're doing that, then yeah,
Tori Stafford's in the conversation. I think
her offensive prowess is better than Harper Murray's.
If we look at the outsides who have had strong
international careers, we're talking like a Jordan
Larson. I'm not seeing any Jordan Larsons floating
around the NCAA right now. We're talking like...
a Kim Hill which yes she surprised a lot of people
coming out of Pepperdine didn't have like a great
or an illustrious college career well I mean
case in point look at Merzik's not playing anywhere
and she was better than all of them well Sarah
Franklin went to Italy so if we're talking Sarah
Franklin like maybe Mimi Collier's in the conversation
I don't know yeah I don't think there's any shoe
-ins But I think there's a couple athletes who've
given a little bit more time and a little bit
more development. The thing is, you need a more
rounded game. You need a well -rounded game.
And when I look at the crop of athletes in the
NCAA right now playing outside, I would say maybe
the only one that I can see have an international
career is maybe Torrey Stafford. I think Harper
Murray would be... a passing sub like a third
left side on a good team I think she could fit
into that role I don't think she has the ability
to score consistently at that level I do like
Collier I have to admit once I've watched her
what what I've seen of her so far this year I
do like Collier I think Collier's got some game
on her and I like that she she can do she can
do a lot of good things Stafford I'm higher on
Collier than I am on Stafford right now to be
honest with you I do like Eva Hudson. Maybe a
little outside, but she's got game. She's got
a lot of game. But is she going to be a national
team outside? Is she going to go play for a top
Turkish team? I think she'd be a B team, a USB
team left side. Let's remember, you've got to
be able to pass and play defense too. Yeah. So
there's that other component being a left side.
At the pro level. Nobody's hiding you. No. You
either can or you can't. And it's a full game
you've got to be able to play. And if you can't
play it, you don't play. But that's the thing.
Scoring in the NCAA, which people who are high
on Harper -Murray, so upset that I was like,
absolutely not. Scoring at the NCAA is not the
same as scoring internationally or for a top
pro team. And I... As you said, she doesn't score
well against a double block. That doesn't bode
well for a top pro career. So I don't know. It's
hard. There's so many parts of the game that
have to be considered. I loved this question.
I think people look at this when we talk about
Harper -Murray maybe being antsy Nebraska and
everything like that, but that's not the case
at all. The question was about a player, and
this has nothing to do with a team. It just has
to do... with the ability of the player to go
to the next level and be a competitive player
at that level. Simple as that. Some people are
great college athletes, and that's it. Christian
Leitner. Everybody. Do you remember Duke basketball?
Everyone thought Christian Leitner was going
to be everything in the NCAA. He was not. Okay,
hold on a second. Who was the left side for Nebraska
that never made it? Michaela Feke. Yes. I want
to talk case in point. Yeah, Michaela Feke. That
is a great example. She was an outstanding college
player and lasted maybe one year pro. It's a
different game. Yeah. We've got two questions
left for all our Nebraska, Texas fans. This is
for you. Many people picked Texas this week as
the number one team over Nebraska, in large part
because Texas has gotten better over the preseason,
whereas Nebraska has remained consistent and
even had to deal with some lineup adjustments
and kinks, getting the libero, getting their
middles more involved. What are your takes? I
don't get that. Nebraska went in number one,
have had some tough matches, and come through
and continue to be number one. I know that people
will look at a situation, because I was thinking
about this before this. If you remember when
they played Michigan, Michigan lost the first
game 25 -22. And then Nebraska steamrolled them
and people are looking at that. Well, you know,
Michigan pushed them. Well, you have to understand
every team that walks, that plays Nebraska comes
out sky high with that adrenaline flowing. And
I've seen this so many times that you come out
and you're going to take down the giant. And
yes, you're pushing them, pushing them, pushing
them. And then you have that dreaded break between
game one and two. when everything comes back
to earth and all of a sudden they beat the snot
out of you. No, Nebraska's number one right now
until somebody can beat them. Period. I mean,
I have two thoughts on that question. One is
you can't fault a team for being consistent.
That's not their fault that they don't have a
ton of room. And the fact that they maintained
consistency while tweaking things, like that
says a lot. Right. But I do think they are getting
better. Look at their right side. She's finding
a rhythm. They're making adjustments to their
game. Rebecca Alec is getting better. They have
a new coach. They're getting new systems in place.
They're solidifying things. They're making changes.
They're getting better. You don't see the changes
as blatantly because they start from such a high
level. But I don't think you can fault somebody
for being consistent. Texas also has several
very young players. on their roster getting game
time. Of course you're going to see improvement.
You have jumped levels. These are great athletes,
but you have to learn the grind of the NCAA.
You have to learn how to take care of your body
and do those things and mentally prepare. And
how do you respond for bad games? Of course you're
going to see those things. And it's expected
with young athletes. And because of the age of
the roster of Texas, that's not surprising in
the least. Now, if nebraska falters and loses
a game texas deserves to be number one if they
don't but until nebraska shows otherwise i think
they deserve to stay in that ranking because
coming into the season texas had a bunch of unknowns
on their roster they've proven those things to
be non -issues but without a head -to -head i
don't think the ranking changes exactly i agree
no notes I agree with both comments. Our last
question of the day. Position by position, who
wins the head -to -head, Nebraska or Texas? So,
yeah, position by position, let's go through
that. And then part two of that question is,
if the teams were to play today, who wins? Where
are they playing? Neutral location. I'm still
going with Nebraska. I just find that they're
the most rounded team. And I think what sets
them apart from every other team in the country
that I've seen play so far is they dig everything.
Everything. I'm a very, very strong believer
that if you can play defense, you always give
your team a chance to win. Defense wins championships,
baby. And yet you picked the offensive middle
for the question. Because I've got somebody back
there digging the ball. Okay, so we're looking
head -to -head. Yeah, let's go head -to -head
because I find this fascinating. Nebraska wins
the setting battle. Everyone knows how I feel
about Ellis Wendell. I agree. I think Nebraska
dominates the middle. I agree. Both positions.
I agree. From a blocking and attacking standpoint.
100%. Right side. Kari Spears versus Adriano.
Right now, I would give the edge to the Texas
right side. Yeah. the edge but I agree with Adam
I see Adriano improving every time I see them
play she's gotten better but the I would give
the edge to Texas right side they're both freshmen
and I would give her the edge right now I think
that the Texas right side has done has had a
better season the one thing I am curious about
Adriano having played pro, has she learned to
deal with pressure a little bit better than Spears
has down the road? I've loved Spears. I think
she's done a fantastic job. That is the one question
mark in my mind of I want to see Spears in some
of those pressure matches. And then does Adriano's
experience in that environment help her in that
situation as we get closer to tournament play?
But for now, I give the edge to Spears as well.
Left sides. We've got Tori Stafford and Vanderwall
for Texas and then Harper Murray and a combination
of Landfair and Sigler for Nebraska. I actually
really like Sigler. I think she's done a really
good job coming in in the role that she's been
given in terms of playing back row. I think overall
I give the edge to Texas. I really like Vanderwall.
I think Vanderwall beats out Landfair, and honestly,
I think Stafford beats out Harper -Murray. I
agree. I think they're better offensively. I
think they're more dynamic as a pair. You give
the team passing to Nebraska, but that's not
just on the left sides. So that's kind of the
toss -up. But I think from a physical and offensive
standpoint, I give the nod to Texas. So at the
end of the day, I think what determines what
happens at the end here is the defense. Well,
because we see setter middles better for Nebraska.
Outsides better for Texas. Liberos, honestly,
I think the Nebraska Liberos are better. I think
Mouch is a better passer. Choboy is a better
defender as a combo. But I think having the setter
middle connection better. with the other ones
close. It just opens things up, and the Nebraska
defensive system kind of pushes them over the
edge. I think Nebraska's pass and serve give
them the edge in a match. I think there's a little
bit of inexperience and weaknesses on the passing
side that could be exploited in Texas. I think
that Nebraska will find a way to do that. That
would be the difference for me. You know, even
though we've laid out our arguments here, People
are going to say we're just Nebraska homers,
and that's why we picked them. Listen, if Texas
comes out and their three outside hitters all
have games, they will beat Nebraska. But I think
Nebraska edges them six to four. They played
10 times this year. With some experience, I think
that those numbers change. We may get our wish
in the NCAA final, hopefully, because that would
be a hell of a match. But last time that happened,
we thought it was going to be a hell of a match.
It was not. It was a destruction. Oof, that was
bad. But I really liked the questions this week.
Outstanding. Really good. Keep them coming. We
know you guys have a lot that you're asking,
that you're thinking about. So be sure to reach
out to us. But I really enjoyed them this week.
Thanks. Thanks a lot for having me. I really
have a lot of fun when I do this. And anytime
you want me to be a guest again, just call on
me and I'll be there. Let the people. Do the
decision -making. Let us know in the comments.
We know that you wanted Paul to come back, so
we obeyed your wishes. You want him to come back
for another one maybe later in the NCAA season
to see how our predictions ended up? I enjoy
having you. It's always a lot of fun. Thanks,
Paul. Thanks, guys. Well, that was quite the
episode. We appreciate Paul coming out and giving
his opinion. I know that he's an avid NCAA volleyball
follower and always has a lot of opinions, so
always great to have him out here, and we will
again. If we look forward to this week, there
are some very good matches coming up that we
think you guys should pay attention to. So on
our radar for the week, Wednesday at 7 p .m.
Eastern, Kentucky versus Texas A &M. And this
could really play out for the standings in the
conference. Just like we were discussing. Stay
tuned for that one. Wednesday also at 10 p .m.
Eastern, we have Arizona State versus Baylor
in the Roll the Dice Conference where anybody
can win on any given night. So pay attention
to that one. We'll see if Baylor can right the
ship because they had a couple bad losses this
week. Friday at 7 p .m. Eastern, we have Pitt
versus Miami, the undefeated battle in the conference.
So we will see if Miami can keep it rolling or
if Babcock will show up and put an end to the
Miami rain in conference play. And then finally,
Sunday at 1 p .m., we have Nebraska versus Purdue.
Now, Purdue has been rolling. They've been beating
some teams. I don't think they're going to beat
Nebraska, but I'm curious to see. This is a character
match for me. Let's see what they're made of.
Let's see how their hitters come out and play
against such a great defense. And so I think
that one's going to be worthwhile to pay attention
to. That concludes this week's episode of Volley
Talk. There's always something shaking in the
volleyball world, and we hope you enjoyed this
little fix. Be sure to follow the show so you
don't miss any updates, and we'd be so grateful
if you'd leave us a five -star review. You can
also find us on Instagram at volleytalk underscore
podcast. If you have a topic you'd like us to
discuss, reach out to us on Instagram or at info
at sarahpavin .com. Thanks so much for joining
us, and we'll be back next week. you